Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!infopiz!lupine!rfg
From: rfg@NCD.COM (Ron Guilmette)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: A GNU Makefile (was: ... header files **and** inline management)
Message-ID: <3943@lupine.NCD.COM>
Date: 17 Feb 91 07:46:44 GMT
References: <1991Feb5.180503.24515@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <3787@lupine.NCD.COM> <1991Feb11.081550.18057@eua.ericsson.se>
Organization: Network Computing Devices, Inc., Mt. View, CA
Lines: 36

In article <1991Feb11.081550.18057@eua.ericsson.se> euamts@eua.ericsson.se (Mats Henricson) writes:
>In article <1991Feb5.180503.24515@mathcs.sjsu.edu> horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann) writes:
>>
>>I agree 100% with Ron that HEADER FILES SHOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED.
>
>Maybe I've misunderstood the whole thing...

Perhaps you have.

>... but I think this is a bad idea.
>The most important thing with a C++ class is its interface to the outside
>world, i.e. the header file. That is why I design the header file first,
>and then the .cc-file.

And you never go back and make any changes to the "interface" part once
you have written it for the first time!?!?!?!

I'd like to meet you someday.  I've never had the opportunity to meet a
"perfect" programmer before!

>That is also why I think .cc-file stubs should be
>generated from .h-files in any decent programming environment.

In other words you want the "implementation" part to be automatically
derived from the "interface" or "specification" part, eh?

Well, join the club.  This idea of "automatic programming" has been the holy
grail of software for about 30+ years now.

Give us another 30 years or so and we'll call you. :-)

-- 

// Ron Guilmette  -  C++ Entomologist
// Internet: rfg@ncd.com      uucp: ...uunet!lupine!rfg
// Motto:  If it sticks, force it.  If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.